Animals: Disease Control

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 12 December 2007,  Official Report, column 696W, on animals: disease control, how much was allocated to each local authority for animal health and welfare work in each of the last three financial years.

Jonathan R Shaw: The sums made available to each authority in each of the last three financial years are set out in the following table.
	Many authorities underspent significantly against these allocations in either or both of the earlier two years for which outturn figures are available. The cumulative effect of these underspends is shown in the totals given at the foot of the table.
	
		
			  Additional funding allocation by local authority  (£) 
			   2007-08  2006-07  2005-06 
			 Barnsley MBC 23,274 23,065 20,510 
			 Bath and NE Somerset 60,017 66,885 72,000 
			 Bedfordshire CC 48,345 53,716 46,283 
			 Birmingham CC 27,315 31,755 24,252 
			 Blackburn w Darwen BC 6,052 5,904 8,975 
			 Blackpool 385 385 n/a 
			 Blaenau Gwent CBC 16,841 17,818 17,344 
			 Bolton Metro 12,208 13,289 14,576 
			 Bradford MBC 39,080 42,161 46,789 
			 Bridgend CBC 35,462 35,780 75,732 
			 Buckinghamshire CC 88,924 96,900 102,657 
			 Bury MBC 2,901 3,159 4,420 
			 Caerphilly CBC 22,521 27,418 27,175 
			 Calderdale MBC 56,904 49,976 50,692 
			 Cambridgeshire CC 72,975 79,983 80,143 
			 Cardiff CC 7,103 5,474 6,695 
			 Carmarthenshire CC 192,297 192,732 171,162 
			 Ceredigion CC 195,113 218,186 207,801 
			 Cheshire CC 90,640 92,900 69,600 
			 City of London (Chelmsford) 10,180 9,710 10,194 
			 City of London (Reigate) 12,673 11,918 n/a 
			 City of London (Wokingham and Reading) 10,852 n/a n/a 
			 City of York 11,570 13,524 15,258 
			 Conwy CBC 146,084 161,170 70,414 
			 Cornwall CC 140,406 159,756 127,891 
			 Coventry 8,020 8,480 8,370 
			 Cumbria CC 295,443 346,291 317,460 
			 Darlington BC 36,649 39,536 27,696 
			 Denbighshire CC 136,373 148,495 200,852 
			 Derby City 10,952 12,040 6,660 
			 Derbyshire CC 199,112 219,264 215,223 
			 Devon CC 500,733 542,203 522,642 
			 Doncaster MBC 46,456 44,392 45,080 
			 Dorset CC 116,435 136,557 128,533 
			 Dudley 17,874 19,285 17,221 
			 Durham CC 81,567 88,180 73,174 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 209,558 224,750 173,452 
			 East Sussex CC 53,730 52,500 54,182 
			 Essex CC 151,834 158,895 158,451 
			 Flintshire CC 73,991 78,825 79,126 
			 Gateshead 5,748 5,695 5,888 
			 Gloucestershire CC 192,720 219,000 222,456 
			 Gwynedd 130,937 148,802 150,147 
			 Hampshire 38,108 2,657 36,095 
			 Halton 2,657 40,869 n/a 
			 Hartlepool 4,550 5,400 n/a 
			 Herefordshire CC 119,768 128,320 133,320 
			 Hertfordshire CC 26,285 30,120 30,928 
			 Isle of Anglesey CC 96,043 105,718 102,646 
			 Isle of Wight 32,449 33,570 33,490 
			 Kent CC 206,990 226,855 254,832 
			 Kirkless MC 29,657 32,004 26,373 
			 Lancashire CC 340,212 320,736 298,860 
			 Leeds CC 29,049 31,740 33,544 
			 Leicestershire CC 62,932 73,064 72,132 
			 Lincolnshire CC 173,691 178,812 166,129 
			 Medway CC 9,159 8,904 10,680 
			 Merthyr Tydfil CBC 66,856 73,936 60,879 
			 Middlesbrough 936 670 832 
			 Milton Keynes 47,032 49,460 47,706 
			 Monmouthshire CC incl. 128,705 111,862 144,910 
			 
			  Torfean in 2007-08
			 Neath Port Talbot n/a 46,612 45,096 
			 Newcastle CC 35,208 n/a n/a 
			 Newport CC 70,412 77,385 78,578 
			 Norfolk CC 129,284 148,796 54,589 
			 North Lincolnshire 23,522 24,816 28,716 
			 North Somerset C 30,158 33,509 32,980 
			 North Tyneside 12,431 13,512 n/a 
			 North Yorkshire CC 414,691 440,210 431,270 
			 Northamptonshire CC 85,188 103,032 92,37.6 
			 Northumberland CC 178,377 205,133 181,116 
			 Nottinghamshire CC 89,521 104,772 113,435 
			 Oldham MBC 58,098 62,979 44,409 
			 Oxfordshire CC 111,629 120,347 134,374 
			 Pembrokeshire CC 133,658 138,948 135,684 
			 Peterborough 12,668 12,369 12,369 
			 Powys CC 253,260 287,641 279,818 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 9,157 8,405 8,160 
			 Rhondda Cynon Taf 50,659 55,230 54,845 
			 Rochdale 5,357 4,860 6,307 
			 Rotherham MBC 33,188 34,489 32,196 
			 Rutland CC 10,839 11,780 11,550 
			 Sandwell MBC 6,357 6,200 5,925 
			 Sefton CC 4,994 5,690 4,167 
			 Sheffield CC 36,169 39,923 33,620 
			 Shropshire CC 127,332 140,000 134,004 
			 Solihull MBC 18,113 18,960 n/a 
			 Somerset CC 224,469 247,769 225,613 
			 South Gloucester C 66,309 77,924 88,476 
			 South Tyneside 6,662 6,662 n/a 
			 Staffordshire CC 268,767 307,796 325,296 
			 Stockton 13,727 13,641 5,640 
			 Stoke on Trent 8,570 n/a n/a 
			 Suffolk 120,884 140,968 135,480 
			 Sunderland 765 n/a n/a 
			 Surrey CC 132,841 147,547 145,460 
			 Swansea n/a 46,512 29,860 
			 Swindon BC 5,242 5,579 6,373 
			 Tameside MBC 630 1,060 5,900 
			 Telford and Wrekin borough 30,618 2,700 31,063 
			 Torfaen n/a 28,273 27,433 
			 Vale of Glamorgan 23,350 46,512 45,000 
			 Wakefield MBC 29,310 n/a n/a 
			 Walsall MBC 4,424 4,311 3,714 
			 Warrington BC 9,491 11,518 12,647 
			 Warwickshire CC 131,630 145,487 145,008 
			 West Berkshire CC 27,061 28,454 28,375 
			 West Glamorgan 66,416 73,796 n/a 
			 West Sussex CC 44,743 46,597 44,821 
			 Wigan council 9,039 19,260 18,732 
			 Wiltshire CC 60,966 86,724 105,756 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 34,542 38,352 32,041 
			 Wirral n/a 1,296 n/a 
			 Wolverhampton CC 3,959 5,256 5,087 
			 Worcestershire CC 227,709 230,914 227,412 
			 Wrexham CBC 57,237 61,745 59,947 
			 Total allocation 8,564,971 9,335,708 8,843,255 
			 
			 Outturn figure  8.7 million 8.2 million

Flood Control: Greater London

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures have been taken to prevent flooding in London since Summer 2007; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: There have been various measures taken throughout London since the summer to reduce the risk of flooding. The Environment Agency led a series of meetings with local London boroughs. It also conducted a series of meetings with the affected local authorities. In addition, the Government Office for London (GOL) led a post 20 July 2007 lessons learned meeting, the outcomes of which will be incorporated into a fundamental check review of the existing London Strategic Flood Response Plan.
	The Environment Agency is also leading an integrated urban drainage pilot in Kingston, funded by DEFRA. This has been developed over the past few months with local authorities and Thames Water and has recommended several ways to address surface water flooding. The Environment Agency and DEFRA will also be feeding into a new Forum 'Drain London' to assess the location and causes of surface water flooding across London and identify solutions.
	Thames Estuary 2100 is an Environment Agency project developing a tidal flood risk management plan for London and the Thames Estuary until the end of the century. The plan will take into account increasing flood risk due to climate change, rising sea-levels, ageing of the existing flood management infrastructure and new development in the defended tidal floodplain.

Water Supply: River Wye

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with Severn Trent on the possibility of securing water supply back-up from the River Wye; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: I have not had any such discussions. It is for Severn Trent to consider the need for increasing provision of water in fulfilment of its duties to maintain adequate supplies of water. The company's plan for meeting demand were set out in its 25 year water resources plans, prepared in 2004. The Environment Agency reported on those plans in 'Maintaining Water Supply', which is available from its web site. The plans are to be updated and will be consulted upon later this year.
	Additional abstractions to provide a back-up supply of water, whether from the River Wye or another source, would need to be licensed by the Environment Agency in line with the provisions of the Water Resources Act 1991 (as amended).

Departmental ICT

Susan Kramer: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many  (a) male and  (b) female members of staff in his Department were issued with personal digital assistants in each year since 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: The current user list for PDA's in core Treasury shows  (a) 59 male users, and  (b) 32 female users. Financial records would only provide the information requested on PDAs purchased from 2001 annually at disproportionate cost.

Government Departments: Property

Francis Maude: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 7 January 2008,  Official Report, column 332W, on government departments: property, in what methodological or statistical ways the data in the table placed in the Library differs from the data provided in the answer of 6 January 2008,  Official Report, column 630W, on the same subject.

Angela Eagle: The data in the table placed in the Library in the answer of 7 January 2008,  Official Report , column 332W, gives the total figures for vacant space recorded on e-PIMS as either actual, future or potential.
	The data provided in the answer of 6 January 2008,  Official Report , column 630W, is for vacant space recorded on e-PIMS only as actual, as that is how the question was interpreted.
	The data provided for HM Courts Service, Home Office and Treasury Group is different for the following reasons:
	 HM Courts Service
	e-PIMS is a working database and the latest information available is used in PQ responses. The data provided in the table placed in the Library was the vacant space recorded as at 10 December. The data provided in the subsequent response was the vacant space recorded as at 17 December. On 11 December HM Courts Service entered a total of 7579m2 vacant space records onto e-PIMS, accounting for the increase in the figure given on 20 December, even though only vacant space marked as actual was included.
	 Home Office
	The data provided in the table placed in the Library gave separate vacant space figures for the Home Office and the national probation directorate, whereas the subsequent response provided the Home Office vacant space inclusive of the national probation directorate.
	 Treasury Group
	Similarly, the table placed in the Library gave separate vacant space figures for HM Treasury and National Savings and Investments whereas the subsequent response combines these in a single figure for the Treasury Group.
	Other small variances are accounted for by the different dates on which information is recorded.

Skin Cancer

Bruce George: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his Department holds regional figures for five year survival rates for skin cancer.

Angela Eagle: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, and has been asked to reply.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 24 January 2008:
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking whether regional figures for five year survival rates for skin cancer are available. (181291)
	For England, five-year survival rates are available for adult patients (aged 15-99 years) diagnosed with skin cancer during 1999-2003 and followed up to the end of 2004. These are given in Table 1 and are also available on the National Statistics website.
	http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=14007&Pos=3&ColRank=1&Rank=422
	Survival rates by NHS region for 58 cancers including skin cancer diagnosed during 1971-90 in England and Wales were published in Cancer Survival Trends* in 1999. Figures for skin cancer, broken down by region are given in Table 2.
	
		
			  Table 1: Five-year age-standardised( 1)  relative survival (percentage) for adults (15 to 99 years) diagnosed with melanoma of the skin( 2)  during 1999 to 2003, followed up to the end of 2004, England 
			Five-year relative survival 
			   Number of patients  Percentage  95 per cent.CI( 3) 
			 Men 13,196 80.4 (79.2-81.7) 
			 Women 17,005 89.4 (88.5-90.3) 
			 (1) As cancer survival varies with age at diagnosis, the relative rates for all ages (15 to 99) have been age-standardised to control for changes in the age profile of cancer patients over time, thus making them comparable with previously published figures. (2) Melanoma of the skin is classified as code C43 in the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10). (3) 95 per cent. confidence intervals (CI).  Source:  Office for National Statistics 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Five-year age-standardised( 1)  relative survival (percentage) for adults (15 to 99 years) diagnosed with melanoma of the skin( 2 ) during 1986 to 1990, followed up to the end of 1995, England and NHS region 
			   Men  Women 
			 England 68 82 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 69 83 
			 Trent 66 82 
			 Anglia and Oxford 72 82 
			 North Thames 66 83 
			 South Thames 66 82 
			 South and West 70 81 
			 West Midlands 71 84 
			 North and West 63 81 
			 (1) As cancer survival varies with age at diagnosis, the relative rates for all ages (15 to 99) have been age-standardised to control for changes in the age profile of cancer patients over time, thus making them comparable with previously published figures. (2 )Melanoma of the skin is classified as code 172 in the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9).  Sources:  Office for National Statistics Table 4.5: Cancer survival trends by NHS region, selected cancers, patients diagnosed 1971 to 1990: age-standardised relative survival rates (with 95 per cent. confidence intervals) at one and five years after diagnosis, and average increases in relative survival on the National Statistics website http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/xsdataset.asp?More=Y and published in: Coleman MP et al (1999) 'Cancer survival Trends in England and Wales 1971 to 1995: deprivation and NHS region'. Studies in Medical and Population Subjects No.61. London: The Stationery Office.

Armed Forces: Children

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many service deaths have occurred where the service parent was in receipt of continuity of education allowance or boarding school allowance at the time of their death since 1997; how many children of deceased service personnel received his Department's financial assistance in these cases; what the total cost has been over that period; how much provision is made in his Department's budget annually for such cases; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: Information prior to the roll-out of the joint personnel administration (JPA) could be provided only at disproportionate cost. In the period June 2006-to date, continuity of education allowance (CEA) payments have been made in relation to 15 Service personnel who have died in service. These payments have related to 21 children. The total cost of these payments is £185,000. There is no specific allocation for provision of CEA in cases of death in service. We cannot predict what future payments will be. However, we are committed to making such payments.

Chad: Peacekeeping Operations

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether transportation and lodging of military forces in support of the European Security and Defence Policy mission to Chad will be financed by the EU or its member states under the costs lie where they fall principle.

Bob Ainsworth: The EU-led mission to Chad and the Central African Republic (CAR) will be funded in accordance with the ATHENA funding mechanism approved by the Council of the European Union in 2004 and as subsequently amended. The mechanism defines which aspects of EU-led military operations are eligible for common funding by member states.
	The incremental costs of deploying elements of the Force HQ to and from the theatre of operations, and associated lodging of Force HQ staff, are eligible for common funding. The costs of deployment and lodging offeree elements commanded by the Force HQ are met by the member states that provide the forces on a "costs lie where they fall" basis. A budget request will be submitted by the Operation Commander for the Chad/CAR operation for scrutiny by the ATHENA Special Committee during January 2008 before a resulting budget is approved.

Defence Equipment and Support Organisation: Finance

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 13 December 2007,  Official Report, column 774W, on Defence Equipment and Support Organisation: finance, what the reasons are for the difference between the expenditure figure provided against financial year 2006-07 and that declared on the home page of the Defence Equipment and Support Organisation's website.

Bob Ainsworth: holding answer 21 January 2008
	The rounded £16,000 million annual budget figure for financial year 2006-07, as shown on the Defence Equipment and Support website, encompasses both equipment and non-equipment resource expenditure. This includes manpower, overhead costs and indirect non cash resource costs such as cost of capital charges on assets and depreciation.
	The figure of £12,130 million for financial year 2006-07, as detailed in my answer of 13 December 2007,  Official Report, column 774W, was for spend on equipment programmes only, including expenditure on all equipment additions, equipment support (including Stock Consumption and Post Design Services), PFI Service Charges and IT and Communications.

Fuels: Finance

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the likely savings to the defence budget achievable through the adoption of fuel hedging.

Bob Ainsworth: Fuel hedging would not in the medium, or long term, necessarily provide any direct savings to the defence budget. However, it would reduce the impact of price changes.
	"Government Accounting" precludes the use of fuel hedging to seek savings to the defence budget as this would involve speculation with taxpayers' money.

Departmental ICT

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what the  (a) start date,  (b) original planned completion date,  (c) current expected completion date,  (d) planned cost and  (e) current estimated cost is for each information technology project being undertaken by his Department; and if he will make a statement.

Huw Irranca-Davies: My Department began work, in November 2007, on the development of new English and Welsh language websites.
	The original completion date for the sites, was end of December 2007, however following revisions, the new websites are due to be launched by the end of January 2008.
	The planned cost of the project is £29,611.

Departmental ICT

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the  (a) start date,  (b) original planned completion date,  (c) current expected completion date,  (d) planned cost and  (e) current estimated cost is for each information technology project being undertaken by her Department and its agencies; and if she will make a statement.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department for Transport is currently undertaking a number of IT projects to enable us to provide better services to our customers or improve the efficiency of our operations. Detailed information in the form requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Information on the key IT projects that are monitored and reported on centrally under the DfT's Investment Appraisal Framework is set out as follows.
	
		
			  Department/Agency  Project name  Start date  Original planned completion date  Expected completion date  Originally planned costs (£ million)  Estimated costs (£ million) 
			 DfT(1) Shared Services Programme April 2005 April 2009 April 2009 31 123 
			 VOSA(2) Commercial Customer Portal January 2004 December 2005 January 2009 9.5 16.7 
			 VOSA(3) Operator Annual Test: E-Test Bookings January 2004 December 2005 January 2009 8.4 16.8 
			 VOSA(4, 5) Mobile Compliance: providing mobile compliance devices to Enforcement Officers March 2003 December 2004 March 2008 7.91 10.8 
			 DVLA(6, 7) Driver Licensing: Drivers Re-engineering Project (DRP) phase 2 August 2003 September 2008 December 2008 109 103.7 
			 DVLA(8) Smart tachograph project July 2000 May 2002 June 2005 13.2 15.1 
			 DVLA(9) Vehicles System Software (VSS) Replatforming January 2005 July 2006, but agreement made with DVO to move date to November 2006 December 2007 8.4 13 
			 DVLA(9) Driver Licence Upgrade (DLUP) July 2004 June 2007 March 2008 21.8 16 
			 DVLA(10) Vehicle Integration Northern Ireland August 2006 November 2008 Second half 2009 23 21.3 
			 DVLA Driver Licence Ten Year Renewals Phase 1 July 2007 May 2008 June 2008 13.3 13.3 
			 DSA Integrated Register of Driver Trainers (IRDT) October 2003 January 2006 February 2007 1.5 3.5 
			 HA Traffic Control Centre: PPP service; providing co-ordinated real time information on traffic conditions across most strategic road network August 2001 August 2011 August 2011 160 over 10 years 160 over 10 years 
			 HA(11, 12) Electronic Service Delivery of Abnormal Loads (ESDAL) April 2004 August 2006 Development June 2009 Development 8.6 Development 9.64 Development 
			July 2008 Operation June 2011 Operation 1.21 Operation 1.21 Operation 
			 (1) Latest estimate subject to satisfactory business case for remainder of the programme. (2) The scope of the portal project has increased since original approval to include new elements such as the adoption of sophisticated data integration and management applications. (3) The scope of E-test bookings has increased since original approval to include a multi- channel solution. (4 )The difference in completion date is due to an increase in project scope to include fixed penalties. (5) Original planned costs for mobile compliance did not include staff costs however, estimated costs to complete include staff costs from April 2005. (6) The previous parliamentary answer of 16 July 2004,  Official Report, columns 1387-88W, only relates to phase 1. The cost of £37 million with a delivery date of December 2005 was achieved within approved funding. These details have been updated to include phase 2. (7) The estimated completion date is currently subject to change pending a current re- scoping exercise. (8 )Smart Tachograph Project—cost variation due to Tachonet implementation, increasing project scope to meet EU legislation requirements. (9) Vehicles System Software Replatforming, Driver Licence Upgrade and slippage due to six month New System Landscape freeze with subsequent replanning activities and rescheduled release slots. (10) Original planned completion date is subject to Business Case approval. (11) The estimated development completion date has increased after re-evaluation of outstanding requirements and subsequent agreement of rebaselined milestone programme. (12) The two-year fixed operational period will commence after completion of development. The change of end date for operations reflects the new programme.

Crime

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many recorded rape offences in Northern Ireland, including attempted rape, led to convictions in each of the last 10 years, broken down by  (a) age and  (b) gender of the victims.

Paul Goggins: The information is not available in the requested format. At present Northern Ireland court proceedings and sentencing data sources do not include victim information in relation to the commission of an offence.
	Table 1 shows the number of recorded rape offences (including attempted rape) from 1998-99 by age group and gender of victim while table 2 outlines the number of prosecutions and convictions for rape offences (including attempted rape) for the calendar years 1996 to 2005 (the latest available years). Court data are collated on the principal offence rule; so only the most serious offence with which an offender is charged is included.
	Recorded crime data cannot be routinely reconciled with prosecution and conviction data as the former relates to the number of offences whereas the latter relates to the number of offenders brought before the courts. In addition, recorded crime data denote each offence as it has been initially recorded and this may differ from the offence for which a suspect or suspects are subsequently proceeded against in the courts.
	Government are committed to improving the rates of successful prosecution in rape cases. Specialist police units, staffed by highly skilled and trained personnel, are dedicated to enhancing the service to victims of rape and sexual assault and both PSNI and the Public Prosecution Service are seeking to develop models of best investigative practice so that more offences can achieve the threshold for prosecution.
	The Northern Ireland Office and the Department of Health and Social and Personal Services have also jointly developed, and consulted on, a Draft Regional Strategy for addressing Sexual Violence in Northern Ireland which will address these issues through a robust action plan delivering on strategic objectives in three key areas—crime prevention, better victim support and improved protection and justice measures. The Strategy is to be published this spring.
	
		
			  Table 1: Recorded rape or attempted rape offences by age and gender of victim 1997-98 to 2006-07 
			   Age under 18  Age 18-64  Age 65+  Age unknown  All ages 
			  1997-98  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 118 149 0 4 271 
			 Total 118 149 0 4 271 
			  1998-99  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 135 171 3 15 324 
			 Total 135 171 3 15 324 
			  1999-2000  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 131 160 1 19 311 
			 Total 131 160 1 19 311 
			  2000-01  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 95 125 1 11 232 
			 Total 95 125 1 11 232 
			  2001-02  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 108 179 0 5 292 
			 Total 108 179 0 5 292 
			  2002-03  
			 Male — — — — — 
			 Female 164 192 0 1 357 
			 Total 164 192 0 1 357 
			  2003 - 04( 1)  
			 Male 5 0 1 0 6 
			 Female 165 222 2 0 389 
			 Total 170 222 3 0 395 
			  2004-05  
			 Male 9 7 0 1 17 
			 Female 157 204 2 0 363 
			 Total 166 211 2 1 380 
			  2005-06  
			 Male 20 15 0 0 35 
			 Female 134 218 3 1 356 
			 Total 154 233 3 1 391 
			  2006-07  
			 Male 27 20 0 0 47 
			 Female 151 257 1 1 410 
			 Total 178 277 1 1 457 
			 (1) Prior to a change in legislation which took place during 2003/04, males could not be classed as victims of rape.  Source:  Central Statistics Unit, PSN1 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Number of prosecutions and convictions for rape or attempted rape 1996-2005 
			   Prosecutions  Convictions 
			 1996 69 15 
			 1997 61 21 
			 1998 48 18 
			 1999 36 8 
			 2000 26 10 
			 2001 34 17 
			 2002 30 10 
			 2003 31 10 
			 2004 37 18 
			 2005 30 8 
			  Source:  NIO Statistics and Research Branch

Community Nurses

Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many family nurse partnership (FNP) programmes are in operation; how many family nurses there are; how many and what proportion of  (a) families and  (b) children (i) have been provided with information on and (ii) are accessing these programmes; where the programmes are located and what criteria were used to determine these locations; what plans there are to expand the FNP programme; what targets and indicators there are for the programme; what research and evaluation is being carried out into it; when the results of that research will be published; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 23 January 2008
	There are 10 Family Nurse Partnership Pilot sites in operation in England, which began operating from March 2007 and which wilt be running as Pilot sites until early 2010. Across the 10 sites there are a total of 57 family nurses, including supervisors. By 4 January 2008, 1,332 mothers had been provided with information by a family nurse about the Family Nurse Partnership programme. Of these, 1,143 (85 per cent.) took up the offer of enrolment.
	The Pilot sites are Barnsley, Derby City, County Durham and Darlington, Manchester, Slough, Somerset, South East Essex, Southwark, Tower Hamlets and Walsall.
	The criteria used to determine these locations as suitable for the Pilot Phase of the Family Nurse Partnership are at Annex A.
	The targets and indicators for sites operating the Family Nurse Partnership in England are listed as "fidelity requirements" at Annex B.
	Over the 2007 Spending Review period (2008-09 to 2010-11) we will be investing £30 million to:
	conduct the final year of the small scale testing phase of the Family Nurse Partnership;
	increase the number of sites testing and delivering the Family Nurse Partnership intervention in England by 20 sites in 2008-09 , with the decision about possible further expansion in subsequent years being informed by evaluation outcomes from operating the first 30 sites;
	conduct a research trial into the impact of the Family Nurse Partnership in England; and
	support integration of the Family Nurse Partnership into the universal Child Health Promotion Programme.
	An interim evaluation report of the Pilot Project's first year will be published in the spring. The final evaluation report of the Pilot is expected to be available in spring 2009, although evaluation of the second year of the pilot has not yet been commissioned. It is also intended to commission a research study to evaluate the impact of the FNP in this country.
	 Annex A
	 Criteria to determine the 10 family nurse partnership pilot sites
	Criteria 1: Strong partnership working and a high degree of NHS/LA service integration
	Criteria 2: Community engagement
	Criteria 3: Commitment to progressive universalism in health led child and family services
	Criteria 4: Workforce capacity and capability
	Criteria 5: Effective local leadership
	Criteria 6: Demographic profile and capacity to identify at risk families
	Criteria 7: IT capacity
	Criteria 8: Record of successful innovation
	Criteria 9: Project implementation plan that demonstrates the capacity and capability to successfully deliver the programme to the timetable outlined in the background information
	Criteria 10: Resources
	 Annex B
	 Family-Nurse Partnership Fidelity Requirements
	Objectives concerning fidelity to program model
	 P rogram is reaching the intended population of low-income, first-time mothers:
	1. 75 per cent. of eligible referrals are enrolled in the program
	2. 100 per cent. of enrolled women are first-time mothers (no previous live birth)
	3. 60 per cent. of pregnant women are enrolled by 16 weeks gestation or earlier
	 Program attains overall enrolment goal and recommended caseload:
	4. A caseload of 25 for all full-time nurses within 8-9 months of program operation
	 Program successfully retains participants in program through child's second birthday:
	5. Cumulative program attrition is 40 per cent. or less through the child's second birthday
	6. 10 per cent. or less for pregnancy phase
	7. 20 per cent. or less for infancy phase
	8. 10 per cent. or less for toddler phase
	 Nurse home visitors maintain established frequency, length, and content of visits with families:
	9. Percentage of expected visits completed is 80 per cent. or greater for pregnancy phase
	10. Percentage of expected visits completed is 65 per cent. or greater for infancy phase
	11. Percentage of expected visits completed is 60 per cent. or greater for toddler phase
	12. On average, length of home visits with participants is = 60 minutes
	13. Content of home visits reflects variation in developmental needs of participants across program phases:
	
		
			   Percentage 
			  Average time devoted to content domains during  P regnancy  
			 Personal Health 35-40 
			 Environmental Health 05-07 
			 Life Course Development 10-15 
			 Maternal Role 23-25 
			 Family and Friends 10-15 
			   
			  Average  t ime  d evoted to  c ontent  d omains during Infancy  
			 Personal Health 14-20 
			 Environmental Health 07-10 
			 Life Course Development 10-15 
			 Maternal Role 45-50 
			 Family and Friends 10-15 
			   
			  Average  t ime  d evoted to  c ontent  d omains during Toddlerhood  
			 Personal Health 10-15 
			 Environmental Health 07-10 
			 Life Course Development 18-20 
			 Maternal Role 40-45 
			 Family and Friends 10-15

Education: Prisons

Nick Hurd: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what steps the Government have taken to improve the quality of prison education since 2001.

David Lammy: I have been asked to reply.
	The transfer of responsibility for offender learning from the Home Office in 2001, to the Department for Education and Skills, now the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, brought the offender learning agenda within mainstream learning and skills arrangements. This led to the introduction of heads of learning and skills, a new senior role within each prison responsible for co-ordinating delivery, Offender learning is inspected by Ofsted (and its predecessors) to the same standards as mainstream education, with published reports since 2002.
	Between August 2005 and August 2006, the Learning and Skills Council completed the introduction of a new offender learning and skills service. This service is designed to integrate delivery both inside and outside prisons, as well as ensuring the quality is consistent with that available in the outside community.
	The new delivery arrangements are governed by the policy framework set out in the 'Reducing Re-Offending Through Skills and Employment' Next Steps document, published jointly by the then Department for Education and Skills, the Home Office, and the Department for Work and Pensions in December 2006. Many of the further changes set out in the Next Steps document are now being piloted in our two test bed regions, the West Midlands and east of England,

Departmental Email

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will take steps to reduce the number of hard copies of e-mails printed by officials in his Department.

Gerry Sutcliffe: My Department is already taking steps to reduce the unnecessary printing of e-mails. My Department has introduced multifunctional printing devices which allow double-sided printing as default. Staff are encouraged as part of the environmental management system to conserve paper by reducing the amount of printing generally. My Department is also introducing an electronic content management system which means that emails will no longer need to be printed for the Department's formal record.

Union Learning Fund

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how many education or training places were funded through the Union Learning Fund in each year since 1998; and how many of these led to qualifications at level  (a) 2 and  (b) 3.

David Lammy: The Union Learning Fund (ULF) is a source of funding to help trade unions boost their capacity as learning organisations and use their influence with employers, employees and learning providers to encourage greater take up of learning in the workplace. It is not used to fund the provision of training courses but enables trade unions and their union learning representatives to provide advice, guidance and support in order to help workers access learning opportunities to improve their skill levels.
	With the help of ULF, trade unions and their union learning representatives have been realty successful in working with employers to help people get back into learning, tackling both organisational and individual skill needs. There are now over 18,000 trained union learning representatives who have helped over 400,000 workers back into learning since the fund was introduced in 1998. Over 150,000 last year alone, many of whom were Skills for Life learners, those most in need of new skills who employers and training providers find it so difficult to reach.

Union Learning Fund

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what the 10 most expensive projects funded under the Union Learning Fund were in each year since 1998; and how much each cost.

David Lammy: Trade unions have a key role to play in promoting the development of learning and skills in the workplace. To help them do this more effectively we introduced the Union Learning Fund (ULF) in 1998. This source of funding is helping trade unions use their influence with employers, employees and training providers to encourage greater take up of learning at work and boost their own capacity as learning organisations, The 10 projects that were awarded the most funding through the ULF in each financial year since 1998 are set out in the following tables identified by the lead union.
	
		
			  Project/union  £ 
			  1998-99  
			 GMB 148,349 
			 AEEU 139,500 
			 USDAW 113,550 
			 GPMU 97,000 
			 MSF 80,135 
			 UNIFI 56,400 
			 MU 50,000 
			 NUJ 50,000 
			 T&G 50,000 
			 UCATT 50,000 
			   
			  1999-2000  
			 GMB 188,210 
			 AEEU 116,065 
			 MSF 162,144 
			 GPMU 158,009 
			 T&G 155,680 
			 Unison 137,325 
			 ISTC 100,733 
			 USDAW 94,450 
			 CWU 87,950 
			 PCS 84,500 
			   
			  2000-01  
			 Unison 560,894 
			 GPMU 345,535 
			 MSF 343,720 
			 GMB 343,217 
			 AEEU 246,350 
			 T&G 201,236 
			 NUJ 176,800 
			 UCATT 167,000 
			 CATU 118,808 
			 NUT 117,750 
			   
			  2001-02  
			 GMB 1,079,568 
			 Unison 831,704 
			 NUT 534,871 
			 T&G 421,540 
			 GPMU 341,804 
			 USDAW 234,892 
			 AEEU 222,450 
			 CWU 210,300 
			 BFAWU 182,206 
			 MSF 161,981 
			   
			  2002-03  
			 AEEU 1,325,481 
			 Unison 1,198,095 
			 GPMU 889,889 
			 GMB 850,049 
			 CWU 848,000 
			 MSF 835,361 
			 T&G 426,128 
			 BFAWU 354,745 
			 NUJ 349,700 
			 ASLEF 280,000 
			   
			  2003-04  
			 USDAW 1,263,981 
			 NASUWT 1,234,029 
			 UNIFI 1,173,347 
			 T&G 891,133 
			 GMB 794,766 
			 POA 691,913 
			 NUT 611,350 
			 GFTU 521,000 
			 PCS 463,081 
			 MSF 427,428 
			   
			  2004-05  
			 GPMU 1,781,950 
			 Rail unions 1,514,600 
			 Amicus 1,478,900 
			 FBU 1,144,000 
			 BFAWU 850,725 
			 Unison 801,600 
			 T&G 588,933 
			 PCS 570,216 
			 UCATT 565,766 
			 GMB 342,522 
			   
			  2005-06  
			 T&G 2,319,299 
			 GMB 1,933,208 
			 UCATT 510,436 
			 Community 380,658 
			 GFTU 249,445 
			 ATL 221,649 
			 PCS 215,000 
			 MU 196,685 
			 BELTU 194,559 
			 USDAW 152,000 
			   
			  2006-07  
			 Amicus 3,414,517 
			 Unison 2,212,528 
			 Rail unions 1,971,951 
			 PCS 1,366,020 
			 FBU 1,248,168 
			 BFAWU 1,190,233 
			 USDAW 1,166,231 
			 CWU 1,138,438 
			 GMB 931,835 
			 POA 883,360

Union Learning Fund

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how much was paid under the Union Learning Fund to  (a) ASLEF,  (b) BECTU,  (c) BFAWU,  (d) Community,  (e) CWU,  (f) GMB,  (g) MU,  (h) NACODS,  (i) NUM,  (j) TSSA,  (k) UCATT,  (l) UNISON,  (m) UNITE,  (n) UNITY and  (o) USDAW in each year since 1998.

David Lammy: Trade unions have a key role to play in promoting the development of learning and skills in the workplace. To help them do this more effectively, we introduced the Union Learning Fund (ULF) in 1998, This funding is helping trade unions use their influence with employees, employers and training providers to encourage greater take-up of learning at work and boost their own capacity as learning organisations. The table sets out how much ULF funding has been awarded to the specific unions in each financial year from 1998/99 up to 2006/07.
	
		
			  £ 
			  Union  1998/99  1999/2000  2000/01  2001/02  2002/03  2003/04  2004/05  2005/06  2006/07 
			 ASLEF — 50,000 93,250 88,200 280,000 126,000 — — — 
			 BECTU 44,000 40,000 59,000 50,934 146,254 57,600 43,200 194,559 — 
			 BFAWU 34,000 65,946 49,562 182,206 354,745 359,168 850,725 — 1,190,233 
			 COMMUNITY — — — — — — — 380,658 — 
			 CWU — 87,950 50,000 210,300 848,000 100,000 — — 1,138,438 
			 GMB 148,349 188,210 343,217 1,079,568 850,049 794,766 342,522 1,933,208 931,835 
			 MU 50,000 50,000 38,365 — — — 38,300 196,685 — 
			 NACODS — — — — — — — — — 
			 NUM — — — — — — — — — 
			 TSSA — — — — — 75,000 — — — 
			 UCATT 50,000 52,000 167,000 50,000 240,599 40,797 566,766 510,436 — 
			 UNISON — 137,325 560,894 831,704 1,198,095 33,210 801,600 130,000 2,212,528 
			 UNITY/CATU — 43,482 118,808 70,070 101,000 — — — — 
			 AMICUS — — — — — — 1,478,900 — 3,414,517 
			 AEEU 139,500 166,065 246,350 222,450 1,325,481 67,639 — — — 
			 MSF 80,135 162,144 343,720 161,981 835,361 427,428 — — — 
			 GPMU 97,000 158,009 345,535 341,804 889,889 240,133 1,781,950 — — 
			 UNIFI 56,400 19,000 68,200 82,800 — 1,173,347 — — — 
			 T and G 50,000 155,680 201,236 421,540 426,128 891,133 588,933 2,319,299 863,600 
		
	
	The recently formed trade union UNITE has not yet received any ULF funding so details have been included of the funding awarded to those unions which have merged to form UNITE—AMICUS, T and G, GPMU, AEEU, MSF and UNIFI.

Departmental ICT

Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform how many  (a) male and  (b) female members of staff working in his Department were issued with personal digital assistants in each year since 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: The Department does not keep historic records of the number of personal digital assistants (PDA's) that were issued to staff or any information on the gender of the user as PDA's are issued solely on the basis of business need.
	Between 2001 and 2006 there were approximately 400 PDA's in use. These were mainly palm devices although a few HP and Compaq PDA's were purchased. The total has reduced as the number of staff in the Department has decreased. At the beginning of 2007 a Blackberry service was implemented. By January 2008 there were 361 PDA's issued to staff. An analysis of this number shows that 235 of these have been issued to male and 126 to female members of staff.

Post Office: Finance

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what the budget was for the running of Post Office Ltd. in  (a) 2007,  (b) 2006 and  (c) 2005; and what it is expected to be in 2008.

Patrick McFadden: This is an operational matter for Post Office Ltd. (POL). I have therefore asked Alan Cook, Managing Director of POL, to reply direct to the hon. Member.
	Copies of the letter will be placed in the Libraries of the House.

Supercomplainer Procedures

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform on how many occasions each of the designated representative bodies under the Enterprise Act 2002 have used the supercomplainer procedures.

Gareth Thomas: Which? has made five super-complaints to the Office of Fair Trading—private dentistry, care homes, Northern Ireland banking, credit card interest calculation methods, and the Scottish Legal Profession. Citizens Advice has made two—doorstep selling and payment protection insurance. Postwatch has made one super-complaint, on mail consolidation and the National Consumer Council has made one, on home collected credit. Energywatch has made one complaint—on billing processes —to Ofgem in its (Ofgem's) capacity as a concurrent regulator.

National Offender Management Information System

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether the developers of C-NOMIS, EDS, will be paid any compensation as a consequence of the system not being rolled out to the probation service.

David Hanson: EDS will receive no compensation as a result of the C-NOMIS system not being rolled-out to probation areas 'Prison NOMIS' continues the development of C-NOMIS, preserving the financial and business benefit from work completed to date.

Prisons: Young People

Rudi Vis: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many juvenile sentenced receptions there were in to  (a) prisons,  (b) local authority units and  (c) secure training centres in England and Wales for (i) less than one month, (ii) between one and three months, (iii) between three and six months and (iv) between six and 12 months in each of the last five years.

David Hanson: The figures for  (a), the number of juveniles received under sentence into all prison establishments in England and Wales can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  Sentence length  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006 
			 Less than or equal to one month 26 48 55 76 108 
			 Greater than one month and less than or equal to three months 931 32 162 200 239 
			 Greater than three months and less than or equal to six months 2,411 2,141 2,257 2,361 2,246 
			 Greater than six months and less than 12 months 967 876 867 854 864 
		
	
	For  (b), local authority secure children's homes, and  (c) secure training centres, data to provide the figures in the form requested is not available. Obtaining the information would involve extensive manual work on individual case files which would constitute disproportionate cost.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Kosovo: Overseas Aid

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what percentage of his Department's spending in Kosovo is assigned to conflict prevention, particularly small arms eradication; and if he will make a statement.

Douglas Alexander: Although no DFID spending in Kosovo has been assigned to conflict prevention the UK has allocated funding through the joint DFID, FCO and MOD Global Conflict Prevention Pool (GCPP).
	In 2007-08 £3 million was allocated from the GCPP for conflict prevention in Kosovo, mainly for the return of refugees, demobilisation of former Kosovan combatants, improvements in Kosovo's Ministries of Justice and Internal Affairs, and resolving property rights in Kosovo.
	In 2007 the UK Government, working with the Provisional Institutions of Self Government and the United Nations Development Programme, provided £73 000 for the collection and destruction of seized small arms. DFID, the FCO and the MOD are actively considering future funding of programmes in this area for 2008.

Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust: Health Services

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what new services and buildings  (a) have been provided and  (b) are planned for the Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust since the approval of the NHS Local Improvement Finance Trust in the area.

Ben Bradshaw: The national health service local improvement finance trusts (LIFT) is mainly designed to support primary care trusts and local authorities to develop their primary health and community care services. Therefore, no new services and buildings have been provided, or are planned, for Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust through the NHS LIFT established in its area.
	However, Redbridge and Waltham Forest LIFT has delivered £15 million of investment to deliver three new one stop primary care health centres. Barking and Havering LIFT has also delivered £66.5 million investment to deliver eight new facilities open to patients with two more under construction.
	
		
			   Barking and Havering LIFT schemes 
			 Completed Thames View Healthcentre, Barking (Primary Care Centre) 
			  Harold Hill Centre, Gooshays Drive, Harold Hill (Primary Care Centre) 
			  Broad Street Centre, Dagenham (Support facilities for Community Mental Health team) 
			  Cranham (GP/Community services) 
			  Church Elm Lane, Dagenham (GP/Community Services) 
			  South Hornchurch, Rainham (GP/Community Services) 
			  Chadwell Heath Healthcentre (GP/Community services) 
			  Marksgate, Romford (GP/Community services) 
			   
			 Under construction Barking Town Centre (general practitioner (GP)/Community services 
			  Porters Avenue (GP/Community services) 
		
	
	
		
			   Redbridge and Waltham Forest LIFT schemes 
			 Completed Wood Street, Waltham Forest (Primary Care and Children Specialist Health Centre) 
			  Comely Bank, Waltham Forest (GP/Community services) 
			  Manford Way, Hainault (GP/Community services)

Barnet Primary Care Trust: Waiting Lists

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the  (a) average and  (b) longest waiting time was in the Barnet Primary Care Trust area for (i) operations for (A) cataracts, (B) heart disease, (C) hip replacement, (ii) cancer, (iii) an MRI scan and (iv) a CT scan in (1) 2006-07, (2) 2007-08 to date and (3) 1997; in each category of treatment how many procedures were conducted; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: The following tables show the average (median) and longest waiting times and total admissions in the Barnet Primary Care Trust (PCT) area for the trauma and orthopaedic speciality (including hip replacements) the ophthalmology speciality (including cataract surgery), and the cardiothoracic speciality (including heart surgery) for 2006-07, 2007-08 to date and 1996-97, and waiting times and total activity for MRI and CT scans for 2006-07, 2007-08 to date. Figures for waiting times and activity for MRI and CT scans in 1997 is not available.
	Statistics on average waiting times for cancer patients and average waiting times for different types of cancer treatment are not collected centrally. Cancer waiting times' standards of a maximum wait of 31 days from diagnosis to first cancer treatment, and a maximum wait of 62 days from urgent referral for suspected cancer to first cancer treatment were introduced for all cancer patients from December 2005. In the last quarter (July to September 2007) national performance against these standards was 99.7 per cent. and 97.2 per cent. respectively. This information is not available by individual PCTs.
	Today waiting times are at a record low; patients can expect a maximum 13 week wait for their first out-patient appointment and a maximum six month wait for an operation.
	Latest data shows that over half of admitted patients (patients who require admission to hospital for treatment) and over three quarters of non-admitted patients are treated within 18 weeks.
	
		
			  In-patient waiting statistics concerning the trauma and orthopaedic specialty for the Barnet PCT area 
			   Month ending  Area  Median waiting time (weeks)  Longest wait  Total admissions 
			 2007-08 September Barnet PCT 7.3 22-23 weeks 2,701 
			 2006-07 March Barnet PCT 7.1 22-23 weeks 2,747 
			 1996-97 March Barnet HA 18.0 18-20 months 1,825 
		
	
	
		
			  In-patient waiting statistics concerning the cardiothoracic surgery specialty for the Barnet PCT area 
			   Month ending  Area  Median waiting time (weeks)  Longest wait  Total admissions 
			   
			   
			 2007-08 September Barnet PCT n/a 10-11 weeks 49 
			 2006-07 March Barnet PCT n/a 8-9 weeks 162 
			 1996-97 March Barnet HA 13.76 9-11 months 283 
		
	
	
		
			  In-patient waiting statistics concerning the ophthalmology specialty for the Barnet PCT area 
			   Month ending  Area  Median waiting time (weeks)  Longest wait  Total admissions 
			 2007-08 September Barnet PCT 5 22-23 weeks 979 
			 2006-07 March Barnet PCT 5.5 25-26 weeks 1,691 
			 1996-97 March Barnet HA 14.32 12-14 months 1,484 
		
	
	
		
			  Diagnostic waiting statistics concerning MRI scans in the Barnet PCT area 
			   Month ending  Area  Median waiting time (weeks)  Longest wait  Total activity 
			 2007-08 October Barnet PCT 2.8 12-13 weeks 3,914 
			 2006-07 March Barnet PCT 4.5 31-32 weeks 4,928 
		
	
	
		
			  Diagnostic waiting statistics concerning CT scans in the Barnet PCT  a rea 
			   Month ending  Area  Median waiting time (weeks)  Longest wait  Total activity 
			 2007-08 October Barnet PCT 2.4 12-13 weeks 5,394 
			 2006-07 March Barnet PCT 3.2 11-12 weeks 8,011 
			  Notes:  1. The data is reported as a snapshot at a point in time. For this purpose the latest available period within the financial year is used. 2. The figures for trauma and orthopaedics, cardiothoracic and ophthalmology specialities show the median waiting times for patients still waiting for admission at the end of the period stated. In-patient waiting times are measure from decision to admit by the consultant to admission to hospital. 3. Median waiting times are calculated from aggregate data, rather than patient level data, and therefore are only estimates of the position on average waits. This should be taken into account when interpreting the data. 4. The parliamentary question states heart, hip and cataract operations. These are sub-sets of the cardiothoracic, trauma and orthopaedic and ophthalmology specialities respectively. 5. Data is not collected for the 1997 period for MRI and CT scan waiting times. 6. For the cardiothoracic speciality, when there is less than 50 waiters in the category, no median has been calculated as the small data set may lead to statistical inaccuracies. 7. Activity numbers are provided for MRI and CT scans, and admission data is provided for the trauma and orthopaedics, cardiothoracic and ophthalmology specialities. These terms both directly relate to the number of procedures undertaken.

Dental Services: Barnet

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to improve access to NHS dentists in Barnet; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: The dental reforms implemented in 2006 gave primary care trusts (PCTs), for the first time, the responsibility for providing or commissioning dental services in their area. It is for PCTs to assess local needs, review current service provision and develop services to meet local needs. Increasing the number of patients seen within national health service dental services is now a formal priority in the NHS Operating Framework for 2008-09 and we have supported this with a very substantial 11 per cent., uplift in overall allocations to PCTs from 1 April 2008.

Emergency Calls

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many emergency calls were made to the ambulance service in each region in each of the last five  (a) years and  (b) new year periods; and how many of these calls were for alcohol-related health problems in each case.

Ben Bradshaw: Information on the number of emergency calls made to the ambulance service in each region between 2002-03 and 2006-07 (the latest data available) can be found in the following table:
	
		
			  Emergency calls received 
			  thousand 
			  Ambulance service  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 England 4,934.7 5,322.8 5,623.8 5,960.1 6,333.4 
			 North East 244.1 262.7 279.7 291.8 362.0 
			 North West 705.8 751.2 779.7 832.0 887.0 
			 Yorkshire 469.9 503.8 522.6 552.6 555.5 
			 East Midlands 419.7 451.3 473.2 459.7 523.3 
			 West Midlands 411.0 441.5 472.8 511.7 541.5 
			 Staffordshire 121.0 125.0 134.8 156.3 125.3 
			 East of England 436.2 492.1 543.3 581.1 625.6 
			 London 1,030.6 1,088.6 1,153.9 1,231.6 1,288.8 
			 South East Coast 403.3 436.1 460.3 493.0 494.4 
			 South Central 277.8 323.1 330.0 336.6 356.1 
			 Great Western 179.2 189.0 200.9 219.8 232.5 
			 South Western 224.9 246.6 259.5 280.5 328.1 
			 Isle of Wight 11.1 11.8 13.0 13.4 13.3 
		
	
	The information in the table is taken from the latest Statistical bulletin "Ambulance Services, England 2006-07", published by the Information Centre. The data is split by ambulance trust configuration at 31 March 2007. However, it should be noted that there were mergers of the majority of NHS trusts providing ambulance services in 2006 (with the exception of London and the Isle of Wight, where the boundaries did not change). For the other trusts, excluding London and the Isle of Wight, the data up to and including 2005-06 for the new trusts is based upon data provided by the trusts in their previous configurations to arrive at the composite figures shown. In addition, with the exception of Great Western Ambulance Trust (which was established on 1 April 2006) the new trusts were established on 1 July 2006 and therefore 2006-07 data for those trusts consists of similarly mapped composite data from 1 April to 30 June 2007 together with the actual figures returned by the new trusts for the remainder of 2006-07. Further details about how the figures were arrived at can be found at page 1, and the footnote to table 3 of "Ambulance Services, England 2006-07".
	There is no defined 'new year' period in the collection of the number of emergency calls. Information on the number of emergency calls that were alcohol-related is not collected centrally.

Emergency Calls: Standards

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if his Department will collect information on the average response time to emergency calls by each national health service ambulance trust.

Ben Bradshaw: The Department has no plans to do so. The ambulance response time data that is collected, and which includes the number of emergency calls received by ambulance trusts across England and their performances against the targets set, is published annually. The latest statistical bulletin, "Ambulance Services, England, 2006-07" was published in June 2007 and is available in the Library and on the Information Centre for health and social care website at:
	www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs

General Practitioners: Barnet

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to improve access to GP services in Barnet; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: It is the responsibility of the local national health service to improve access to general practitioner (GP) services in their own areas.
	However, we are advised by NHS London that 2007-08 will see an extra £250,000 made available to practices by Barnet primary care trust (PCT) to improve access to GP services. From 2008-09, £400,000 will be accessible on a recurrent basis to be mainly used to keep surgeries open longer.
	The Department's aim nationally is that at least 50 per cent., of GP practices in each PCT area will be providing extended opening hours at weekends and/or at weekday evenings offering access to routine appointments, based on patients' expressed views and preferences.

Hearing Aids: Digital Technology

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what data is used for determining funding for digital hearing aids and NHS audiology services.

Ivan Lewis: Funding for hearing aids and audiology services is provided to primary care trusts (PCTs) as part of their general allocations. It is the responsibility of local health organisations to determine the level of audiology funding based on their knowledge of the needs of their local populations.
	The PCT general allocations are calculated on a weighted capitation basis.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the  (a) mean and  (b) median (i) inpatient and (ii) outpatient waiting times were in each year from 1993-94 to 2006-07, as given by (A) Korner and (B) Hospital Episodes Statistics data.

Ben Bradshaw: The figures are shown in the following tables.
	It should be noted that Korner data measures the numbers still waiting at the end of a period, while Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) measures the time waited for patients admitted during a year. HES figures do not take into account periods of suspension for medical and social reasons.
	The NHS has delivered access targets through better waiting list management. This means that routine cases are seen "in turn" once clinical priorities have been treated. Median waits initially increase as the longest wait patients are treated and this is reflected in the HES figures.
	
		
			  Inpatient mean and medians in weeks from 1994 
			   Korner aggregate returns  HES 
			  Year ending  Median commissioner  Mean commissioner  Median provider  Mean provider 
			 March 1994 14.4 20.2 5.9 13.0 
			 March 1995 12.5 17.8 6.1 12.9 
			 March 1996 11.8 15.9 6.0 12.6 
			 March 1997 13.2 18.1 5.7 11.8 
			 March 1998 14.9 20.0 5.9 12.8 
			 March 1999 12.9 18.6 6.4 14.1 
			 March 2000 12.9 18.7 6.1 12.9 
			 March 2001 12.6 18.1 6.3 13.3 
			 March 2002 12.7 17.4 6.7 13.7 
			 March 2003 11.9 15.6 7.0 14.1 
			 March 2004 10.2 12.4 7.1 13.6 
			 March 2005 8.5 10.6 7.4 12.0 
			 March 2006 7.3 8.7 7.3 11.1 
			 March 2007 6.2 7.4 7.0 10.4 
			 October 2007 5.0 6.2 n/a n/a 
			  Notes: 1. HES figures relate to patients admitted during financial year ending March. 2. Korner figures relate to numbers waiting as at 31 March (or at 31 October for the current figures).  Source: QF01 return, HES. 
		
	
	
		
			  Outpatient mean and medians in weeks from 1994 
			   Korner aggregate returns  HES 
			  Year ending  Median commissioner  Mean commissioner  Median provider  Mean provider 
			 March 1994 5.4 9.4 n/a n/a 
			 March 1995 5.8 9.1 n/a n/a 
			 March 1996 6.1 8.7 n/a n/a 
			 March 1997 6.1 8.6 n/a n/a 
			 March 1998 6.4 9.2 n/a n/a 
			 March 1999 6.9 10.0 n/a n/a 
			 March 2000 7.4 11.1 n/a n/a 
			 March 2001 7.4 10.8 n/a n/a 
			 March 2002 7.3 10.4 n/a n/a 
			 March 2003 7.2 8.7 n/a n/a 
			 March 2004 7.0 7.9 n/a n/a 
			 March 2005 7.0 7.5 7.0 8.3 
			 March 2006 6.5 6.9 6.9 7.8 
			 March 2007 5.0 5.6 n/a n/a 
			  Notes: 1. HES figures relate to patients admitted during financial year ending March. Outpatient HES only available from 2004-05. 2. Korner figures prior to March 1998 are provider based.  Source: QM08R return, HES.

Incontinence: Medical Equipment

John Grogan: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what patients groups and professional and industry representatives he has met in relation to his Department's consultation arrangements under Part IX of the Drug Tariff for the provision of stoma and incontinence appliances and related services to primary care.

Dawn Primarolo: On 9 March 2006, the former Minister of State, met Lord Campbell-Savours and a representative from the Ileostomy and Internal Pouch Support Group. The Disability Lobby raised the review during a meeting with the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Ivan Lewis) on 26 April 2007.

Lambert Hospital

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what plans he has for the future of the Lambert hospital;
	(2)  what the staffing levels are at Lambert hospital in Thirsk.

Ann Keen: The organisation, or reconfiguration of local services is a matter for the national health service locally; in this instance the North Yorkshire and York primary care trust (PCT) working in conjunction with clinicians, patients and other stakeholders.
	Information on staffing levels at the Lambert hospital is not held centrally. This can instead be obtained direct from the North Yorkshire and York PCT.

Liver Diseases

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps  (a) he has taken in each year since 1997 and  (b) plans to take in each of the next three years to reduce the incidence of liver disease; what discussions (i) he, (ii) Ministers in his Department and (iii) officials have had since January 2007 with representatives of  (A) the medical profession and  (B) the brewing industry on the matter; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: We are concerned about the increasing incidence of—and mortality from—liver disease. Since 1997, we have taken important action on a number of fronts to combat the primary causes of liver disease, namely alcohol misuse, viral hepatitis and obesity.
	In 2004, the Government published the first ever cross Government alcohol strategy. The Government's renewed alcohol strategy, 'Safe. Sensible. Social—the next steps in the National Alcohol Strategy', published in June 2007, builds on this and focuses on 18-24 year-old binge drinkers, young people under 18 who drink alcohol and harmful drinkers.
	In 2007, the Department negotiated a ground breaking agreement with the drinks industry and by the end of this year we expect the majority of alcoholic drink labels to include alcohol unit information.
	As part of the recent spending review, the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Alistair Darling) announced that a new national priority for the national health service would be to reduce the rate of hospital admissions for alcohol related conditions. This is expected to encourage earlier identification of, and intervention for, people who drink too much, linked to advice and support from general practitioners or hospitals—shown to be the best way of reducing the kind of 'everyday' drinking which, over time, can lead to liver disease and other problems.
	The Government will shortly be embarking on a £10 million advertising campaign on alcohol and health—the biggest ever. This will focus on daily drinking guidelines, so that people are better able to estimate how much they are drinking.
	We have in place a range of measures to prevent and control Hepatitis B and C, which can cause serious liver disease. For example, the Hepatitis C Action Plan for England, launched in 2004, sets out a framework of action to improve the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis C, and is supported by a centrally funded awareness campaign.
	Evidence shows a direct link between obesity and fatty liver disease. Reducing obesity across the population is a key Government priority. Action to tackle obesity in both adults and children will be taken forward through the new cross-Government obesity strategy.
	In addition, we are considering the possibility of developing a strategy for liver disease, which would cover health promotion as well as the full range of health services. Decisions will be informed by preliminary work undertaken in 2007, which has included a series of informal meetings with members of the medical profession and other stakeholders.
	I recently met with Professor Ian Gilmore, president of the Royal College of Physicians, to discuss tackling alcohol related harm. Since January 2007, Ministers and officials have also met with the Food and Drink Federation, Alcohol Concern, the Wine and Spirits Trade Association, British retail Consortium and other representatives of the alcohol industry.

NHS: Negligence

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to paragraph 21, page 67 of his Department's resource accounts for 2006-07, on what basis his Department calculated the periods over which clinical negligence provisions are expected to be payable.

Ann Keen: All clinical negligence claims are managed and accounted for by the NHS Litigation Authority. In arriving at its valuation of provisions when constructing its own annual accounts the authority effectively reviews the value of individual reported claims against the national health service.
	This review is part of the continuous legal process adopted by the authority and includes an assessment of the likely timing of settlement of each claim ie the point at which any damages payable are likely to be agreed along with associated third party costs. For claims not yet reported but where the negligent incident is considered to have already occurred the authority makes a global incurred but not reported (IBNR) provision in its accounts. This IBNR provision is an actuarially assessed value based upon extensive data, held by the authority, relating to the level of reporting of negligent incidents within the English NHS.
	The value of this IBNR provision is also subject to an assessment of likely timing both in regard to when the claims are likely to become reported but also when they are likely to settle.
	Essentially the authority then combines the individual claims data for all known claims with the global IBNR calculation in order to arrive at a forecast regarding the future timing and value of the settlement of claims against the NHS and it is these results which are reported within paragraph 21 on page 67.

NHS: Negligence

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to paragraph 21, page 67 of his Department's resource accounts for 2006-07, for what reason provision for clinical negligence was increased during 2006-07.

Ann Keen: The reporting of clinical negligence provisions referred to in paragraph 21 is essentially data reported from the activities of the NHS Litigation Authority. There are several reasons for the increases in value of clinical negligence provisions in any given financial period and during 2006-07 the main ones were:
	the value of new claims reported to the authority where the negligent treatment had been delivered in the same financial period ie where a patient has brought a claim for negligence in the same financial year that they allege negligent treatment. (Claims reported in 2006-07 where the negligent treatment was in an earlier financial year would already have been provided for in the accounts of the authority as incurred but not reported (IBNR));
	where the value of existing claims has requires alteration due to improved or further knowledge regarding the individual claim, eg where the courts have established new values for specific heads of damage or where original valuations excluded damage which is subsequently agreed to be relevant through the litigation process; and
	actuarial review of IBNR suggests that forecast values of claims to be reported in the future require amendment, for example because claim reporting patterns appear to suggest more claims than originally forecast are being reported for a particular financial period or periods.

Screening

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what estimate he has made of the number of adults who received a regular check up on the NHS in the latest period for which figures are available;
	(2)  how many more adults in each year from 2007-08 to 2010-11 he expects will receive a regular check-up on the NHS; and how frequently each adult will receive these check-ups;
	(3)  by what date he expects his programme for every adult to receive a regular check-up on the NHS to be fully implemented;
	(4)  what guidance he has issued to trusts to ensure that every adult receives a regular NHS check-up.

Ben Bradshaw: The General Medical Services contract requires general practitioner practices to:
	invite all newly registered patients for a consultation within six months of registration;
	provide, on request, a consultation to all patients aged 75 or over who have not had a consultation within the last 12 months; and
	provide, on request, a consultation for patients aged 16 to 74 who have not had a consultation within the last three years.
	There is no data collected centrally on the number of adults who receive such consultations.
	The Department is currently developing proposals for a screening programme. The purpose of the screening programme will be to identify people's levels of risk for cardiac and vascular disease so that they can be offered preventive measures.
	The exact nature of a vascular risk assessment and management programme—and the operational timescales for implementing the programme—are still the subject of developmental work.